Instamine not mentioned?
Radical emission cut also omitted?
You know lying by omission is still lying, right?
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lying_by_omission
Quote
“You told the truth up to a point, but a lie of omission is still a lie.”
—Capt. Jean-Luc Picard (cautioning Starfleet Cadet Wesley Crusher)
Lying by omission, otherwise known as exclusionary detailing, is lying by either omitting certain facts or by failing to correct a misconception.
Selective reporting in the media
Media outlets are under pressure to make money, and an easy way to do this is by breaking sensational stories. This can encourage the media to overplay news stories or leave out information that would detract from an otherwise great story.
—Capt. Jean-Luc Picard (cautioning Starfleet Cadet Wesley Crusher)
Lying by omission, otherwise known as exclusionary detailing, is lying by either omitting certain facts or by failing to correct a misconception.
Selective reporting in the media
Media outlets are under pressure to make money, and an easy way to do this is by breaking sensational stories. This can encourage the media to overplay news stories or leave out information that would detract from an otherwise great story.
There goes Bitcoinist's journalistic integrity and reputation, if they ever had any.
Instead of attacking the messenger, why not respond to the charge of Bitcoinist lying by omission?
Don't you thinks it's a bit odd to write an article purporting to be about "The Origin of Dash" but "accidentally" forget to mention the "accidental" instamine and subsequent/compounding radical emission cut?
Allow me to repeat the question for emphasis, since you seem to be unable to focus on anything beyond unsolicited personal advice.
Don't you thinks it's a bit odd to write an article purporting to be about "The Origin of Dash" but "accidentally" forget to mention the "accidental" instamine and subsequent/compounding radical emission cut?
